pint VS astropy

Something I briefly mention in the post is pint [0] for Python, but unfortunately, I don't think dimensions can be specified via type annotations.

At least you can check the input of functions at runtime [1].

[0]: https://github.com/hgrecco/pint

[1]: https://pint.readthedocs.io/en/stable/advanced/wrapping.html

Only tangential to this but somebody might find it usefull. I’m doing lots of calculations in Python involving various units. I’m using a similar library called Pint. https://github.com/hgrecco/pint

My business is thermodynamics of power plants. Professionals in the industry tend to use convenient units like C, bars, kJ/kg and so on. But the formulas usualy need basic SI units.

Same question for pint?

On one hand, it stinks that it's not going better for them. On the positive side, it looks like if there was a real emergency the crew could have escaped.

I was pleasantly surprised to see this pop up on /r/opensource. It looks like blue origin is contributing to open source now https://github.com/hgrecco/pint/pull/1574.

I couldn't resist searching for 'kibi', and yep! [0]

[0] https://github.com/hgrecco/pint/search?q=kibi

One could be a project for accuracy. By integrating physical models and with the inspiration of existing important projects like Skyfield or Astropy, this project could focus on providing the most accurate and performant results possible in Ruby. Contributors could help optimise the code, running benchmarks, and covering as many use cases as possible.

Astropy [0] lives at the heart of most work. It has a Python interface, often backed by Fortran and C++ extension modules. If you use Astropy, you're indirectly using libraries like ERFA [6] and cfitsio [7] which are in C/Fortran.

I personally end up doing a lot of work that uses the HEALPix sky tesselation, so I use healpy [2] as well.

Openorb is perhaps a good example of a pure-Fortran package that I use quite. frequently for orbit propagation [3].

In C, there's Rebound [4] (for N-body simulations) and ASSIST [5] (which extends Rebound to use JPL's pre-calculated positions of major perturbers, and expands the force model to account for general relativity).

There are many more, these are just ones that come to mind from frequent usage in the last few months.

[0] https://www.astropy.org/

Users interested in a broader range of astronomical tools beyond coordinate transformations may be interested in https://www.astropy.org/ and its affiliated packages.

I'm working on a pure Rust approximation of astropy. Up til now, I was able to recreate the intent by looking at an external API, but I'm moving on to functionality that I don't understand enough to implement without basically copying the code. Astropy uses the BSD-3 license, and it wraps the ERFA library which uses a custom license. My project currently uses the MIT license. My PR is here - my question is have I attributed everything correctly, or is there anything I need to change for everything to be above-board?

For folks who might be interested in astronomical calculations but who don't want to roll their own library, astropy (https://www.astropy.org/) is widely used by professional astronomers.